click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121114
20121114
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
closing loopholes. that is a reputation of what john boehner suggested in the days since the president has been re-elected. >> that's totally right. a key point, the simpson-bowles tax idea is kind of a magic pony, right. everyone agrees in the ab instruct, we can bring down the rates, close loopholes and deductions and raise revenue. if that's such a wonderful idea how come it's only come up now. how come no one has done it. the reason is because it's really, really hard politically. once you get into the specifics. if you're trying to tie all the revenue to this abstract tax reform idea you're going to get into a position where the revenue is about never going to happen because once you get into reality it doesn't materialize. >> you have to do both, john. you have to do -- you have to raise the the rates and close loopholes to get the amount -- >> just raise the rates. >> you can't raise the rates high enough to produce $1.6 trillion. >> you can get $900 billion from expiring the bush tax cuts. >> and where do you get the other $700 billion from from. >> do a little reform and cut the r
boehner, who have already openly said, no increases in tax rates? >> well, you have to splinter off some republicans, in the senate it will be easier because you just have to get to 60. you might pass the december 31st deadline where you have a few more democrats in the senate. but the problem is always going to be the house. i think there may be a bargain in the -- in the side of coming to republicans and saying, here are cuts. but the price of those cuts will be that 2%. republicans will face a very tough choice in just a very short time. are they the ones that are going to be responsible for giving 98% of americans tax hikes? do the republicans want to be known as the party that raised your taxes for everybody but 2%? >> right. and i think, martin -- >> so, the 2% solution may be a noose around the republicans' neck. >> i think the republicans have little leverage. not just for that reason but a couple of other reasons. if you consider the fact that taxes are at 15% of gdp, spending is at 24%, even the paul ryan budget proposes we only reduce spending to 20% of gdp. that means five pe
tax increases one way or another. bill: do you think that flies in the u.s. house? does john boehner have the votes to match that? >> the white house figures he will portray himself as the chapel yofnt middle class and the republicans are going out for the rift and he feels he can largely beat hem into submission. when they sit down to the bargaining table they might make some changes but he will want to come out of these negotiations as having largely won them and leaving scraps for the republicans. what the republicans have to hit back with is the way you increase revenues is by having rising incomes. you don't get that by higher taxes on a weakening economy. bill: the president plans to open the talks using his most recent budget proposal. wasn't that the budget that got zero votes in the senate? >> he's going to exploit it for all it's worth. you could come to an agreement using bowles and simpson and reducing rates so everyone declares victory. you have got more revenue but the rates don't go up. but i don't think the president is interested in that. if you had normal people doi
incomes now and ensuring security for the future. hthis is the end of vision that speaker boehner without for the country last week. i cannot think why the present would not embrace it. someone said we should go over the cliff. just go off of the cliff. hope for the best. i do not think that is what the american people had in mind when they went to the polls last week. but they had in mind is that we put the contest of the past two years behind us and work it out. the best way forward in the way that will lead to jobs and growth, a smaller deficits, and you were political fights is to keep everyone where they are. figure out a way to avoid the automatic defense cuts scheduled to hit at the end of the year without putting a penny last thing we promised and committed to the entitlement reforms that we all claim we want. a simpler tax code that lowers rates and cuts special interest loopholes would create jobs and result in more revenue without raising anyone's rates. we know this because we have seen it before. it actually works. i do not think washington should get any of that extra revenu
are at a dinner this evening. hosted by the speaker of the house, john boehner. shep? >> shepard: mike emanuel live on capitol hill. just in to fox news from the o really file? the chief operating officer of the long island power authority or lipa is stepping down in the wake of super storm sandy. this comes on the same day an attorney filed a lawsuit against lipa claiming negligence in the aftermath. and the attorney is seeking class action status potentially including hundreds of thousands of long island customers who, in some cases have had no power for two weeks. the feds say only about 25,000 customers in the storm zone are still in the dark only. certainly a major improvement since just yesterday when the number was three times that. but today as the new york city mayor michael bloomberg pointed out that figure does not include tens of thousands of homes and businesses that are destroyed or too badly damaged for crews even to restore electricity. >> the majority of new yorker who's remain without power do so not because the utilities can't provide power on the street but because necessar
. john boehner still in the house for the time being at the treasury. the president is back in the white house and harry reid is in the senate with a few more seats. why should i believe this would end any more positively than the summer of 2011? >> because again i'm not going to try to talk to you in optimism but let's look at what's changed. you have republican leadership acknowledging for the first time in this debate in public that it's agreed to increase in revenues as part of an agreement that helps restore fiscal balance. that's a very important change. you can debate on what motivated that change, and of course it's true that approach has been a popular very substantial support among the american people. you have a much greater recognition that the economy would benefit on a carefully designed balanced agreement on fiscal reform and putting it off indefinitely is not good for the country. that's important, too. and i also think again if you listen carefully to what people are saying and what many politicians are saying with many elected representatives are saying there's a lot of
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)